Watch malice attack it and ignorance deride it.... but there it will remain.

Sparhafoc wrote:as I've explained before, the vast majority of the world's knowledge is not in any way contingent upon knowing the name of one's great (x10) grandfather.

For example, the way we know how gravity operates, or that the Earth orbits the Sun, or that all material is comprised of very small units which bond together in various ways... not one of these requires knowledge of a great (x10) grandfather's name, and knowing one's great (x10) grandfather's name would neither provide this information, nor be of any use in attaining this information.

So for example, if we want to look at the age of something dramatically greater than our great (x10) grandfather's age - which we can assume for the argument is about 300 years ago - we can use a variety of techniques to date the age of that object, wholly independent of anyone's name being known.

To make this clearer for you eass3, I will mimic your argument but change some details to see if you find it convincing.

You do not know the name of the guy or gal who made your underwear, therefore you can't know what you ate for breakfast this morning.

It is exactly the same non-sequitur arrangement of clauses as your argument. The result clause does not follow from the the preceding hypothetical clause, therefore your argument makes no logical sense - it literally is meaningless.

Sparhafoc wrote:To make this clearer for you eass3, I will mimic your argument but change some details to see if you find it convincing.

You do not know the name of the guy or gal who made your underwear, therefore you can't know what you ate for breakfast this morning.

It is exactly the same non-sequitur arrangement of clauses as your argument. The result clause does not follow from the the preceding hypothetical clause, therefore your argument makes no logical sense - it literally is meaningless.

nah nah our mum has seen our papa who has opened her underwear for sure. it is damn we are did not seen him before our birth. but that does not means that we are dropped from the sky into her womb.

our mothers underwear was not only opened by our real papa our also our mum was tilled by him. and we are issue of such matter. not that we are dropped from sky into her womb.

so no saying that there is no papa before our birth. and if we are damn ignorant that does not mean that our mum is also ignorant fool. and did not seen our papa ( like us ) and dont know it that who tilled her or opened her underwear,.

So you don't know what you ate for breakfast this morning then as a result?

Sparhafoc wrote:As far as I can see, you've only made 2 arguments amidst several thousand words of mostly copied and pasted silly insults which are just puerile and reflect only on you - like your obsession with strangers sucking your dick and your need to tell strangers that you've got a big dick. To me, you sound like you're 10 or 11 years old.

2 arguments you've made and both where comprehensively defeated in just a few words. That's how good your discursive capabilities are.

Have you even tried to counter those rebuttals? No, of course not - you've just been abusive, childish, and generally inane.

Sparhafoc wrote:So you don't know what you ate for breakfast this morning then as a result?

Or is the 'argument' completely nonsensical?

i dont know who tilled my mum ( nor you know who tilled yours ) cuz we never seen our real papa before our births. but that does not means that our mums is also damn ignorant like us. and did not seen who opened her underwear and tilled her.

Sparhafoc wrote:Ok, well you're clearly not worth wasting any more time on, and it's very unlikely you'll be here for long anyway.

So good luck with the Krishna thing. Hope you grow up sometime soon too!

and you will waste what ? time ? on me ? ( just see the fun ) when the real fact is your entire life is already wasted. and if it is not wasted at all. than ( fertile brain ) recall everything which you have thought or done on each second within`1 minute and prove it that it is not wasted at all.

and now ( take it as granted ) that you will not recall anything at all. cuz your life is really an waste but ( fun part is ) you are shifting burdon of proof on me. that is the damn fun part.

it is you who is joke in the first place. not me. so dont shift burdon of proof. and kindly stay silent like an dead horse.

eass3 wrote:and if anyone is really intelligent person in this forum than kindly come forward and prove yourself.

Speaking of intelligence...

I'm not really interested in your childish beliefs, but i give you a friendly suggestion as it seems that you don't eat meat. Meat is the best source of creatine, if you avoid meat there is a high risk that your creatine levels are low and it will affect negatively on your memory and intelligence among other things. I highly suggest you start using creatine monohydrate supplementation if not already. Don't play with your health.

"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield, and those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced, but one is less unwise."

eass3 wrote:and if anyone is really intelligent person in this forum than kindly come forward and prove yourself.

Speaking of intelligence...

I'm not really interested in your childish beliefs, but i give you a friendly suggestion as it seems that you don't eat meat. Meat is the best source of creatine, if you avoid meat there is a high risk that your creatine levels are low and it will affect negatively on your memory and intelligence among other things. I highly suggest you start using creatine monohydrate supplementation if not already. Don't play with your health.

nah nah dont shift burdon of proof on me. for it is actually me who dont cares for your bluff. for you are in the position of child but the disease is posing like an mother.

it is an western disease to remain an student and pose like an teacher. no perfect knowledge simply some dry talkings and bogus opinions.

thanks for such bluff. but what is the value of nonsense which is coming from the damn child ? is that nowdays child knows more than there mother ? is that you have become such modern now ?

than you are bluffing me. and you are no more intelligent in the first place. but the damn joke in the first place.

and where is that intelligent person ? who takes suggestion from the damn child instead of mother ? where is such intelligent person ? and even if someone takes advice from the damn child. will he remain intelligent anymore than ? and not the damn joke in the first place like you ?______________

and if anyone is actually son of 1 man OR say suck breast of there mothers in childhood than kindly come forward and prove yourself. that you are actually intelligent in the first place.

eass3 wrote:nah nah dont shift burdon of proof on me. for it is actually me who dont cares for your bluff. for you are in the position of child but the disease is posing like an mother.

it is an western disease to remain an student and pose like an teacher. no perfect knowledge simply some dry talkings and bogus opinions.

thanks for such bluff. but what is the value of nonsense which is coming from the damn child ? is that nowdays child knows more than there mother ? is that you have become such modern now ?

than you are bluffing me. and you are no more intelligent in the first place. but the damn joke in the first place.

and where is that intelligent person ? who takes suggestion from the damn child instead of mother ? where is such intelligent person ? and even if someone takes advice from the damn child. will he remain intelligent anymore than ? and not the damn joke in the first place like you ?______________

and if anyone is actually son of 1 man OR say suck breast of there mothers in childhood than kindly come forward and prove yourself. that you are actually intelligent in the first place.

and that is another thing if there is none.

Did your mom give you permission to post in this forum?

"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield, and those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced, but one is less unwise."

eass3 wrote:although my english is not very grammatically, rhetorically correct and Rascals are concerned with grammar. Actual workers are concerned with thoughts.

and you mean that i dont make sense in spite of explaining this Practical explanation ? and you make more sense by shifting burdon of proof or say by explaining anything at all ?

( just see the fun ) now what is the damn role of this english in telling us name of your 10th grandfathers, 10th grandfatehrs, grandfather ?

what is the damn role ? but because you are all hypocrite frauds so you must take shelter of english english grammer grammer. and that will also not support you in spite of taking of its shelter, ;') it will also piss on your face. cuz hypocrite frauds has no shelter. ;')

so now kindly lick and jump on your english and grammer cuz they are practicaly an failure/

Ok, so I didn't see this post until now. (Buried under a lot of mess...)

So you say thoughts are what matters?

Here's a thought: You're complete idiot.

You're too dumb to realize how much communication matters, and how little sense your pseudo-intellectual "thoughts" are making. You really need to familiarize yourself with Dunning-Kruger.

The stuff you've proposed here (what little of it that actually is coherent) is basically at the philosophical level of a 10-year-old. Now if you are actually 10, then fair enough. But I gather from your arrogance and wildly misguided over-confidence that you're a bit older than 10.

But if you don't know the name of your 10th grandfather's neighbour's cat, then you might just forget to undo that ban for ever and ever and ever!

Rascals, suck on my big big.

I don't get what the hell all that 10th grandfather stuff was about, anyway.

I mean, was it supposed to be some huge point if I don't know? So if I called my dad who is big on genealogy and found the name of my "10th grandfather", would that mean I had disproven ass3's big theory or something?

Gnug215 wrote:I don't get what the hell all that 10th grandfather stuff was about, anyway.

I mean, was it supposed to be some huge point if I don't know? So if I called my dad who is big on genealogy and found the name of my "10th grandfather", would that mean I had disproven ass3's big theory or something?

You don't know X, therefore you can't know Y.

That was the sum of eass3's point.

So... you don't know what I ate for breakfast, therefore you can't know that the Earth orbits the Sun.

Amusingly, even as inane as that argument is, it actually gets worse.

Firstly, it's used to wedge in an irrelevant and supernatural claim

you don't know X specific detail about the past, therefore Krishna is real

Secondly, the chap wants to also suggest that lending belief to Krishna somehow circumvents this because otherwise eass3's argument defeats his own belief in Krishna if he doesn't know his great (x10) grandfather's name.

Basically, it's just wibble of the lowest order and it's clear eass3 wouldn't be amenable to any level of serious discussion.

"Every man is a creature of the age in which he lives, and few are able to raise themselves above the ideas of their time." “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” ~~Voltaire

"Every man is a creature of the age in which he lives, and few are able to raise themselves above the ideas of their time." “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” ~~Voltaire